Integrity Medical Product Solutions, LLC v. Seroclinix Corporation
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 INTEGRITY MEDICAL PRODUCT Case No. 22-cv-00785-BAS-BLM
SOLUTIONS, LLC,
12
ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’
Plaintiff, 13 JOINT MOTION (ECF No. 56) v. 14 SEROCLINIX CORPORATION, et al., 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 This case arises from a contractual dispute between Plaintiff Integrity Medical 19 Product Solutions, LLC (“Integrity”) and Defendants Seroclinix Corporation, a Canadian 20 corporation (“Seroclinix Canada”), and Seroclinix Corporation, a Delaware corporation 21 (“Seroclinix Delaware”). Before the Court are the parties’ Joint Motion to (1) withdraw 22 Seroclinix Delaware’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 42); (2) allow 23 Plaintiff to file a Fourth Amended Complaint; (3) allow Defendants to file a Third-Party 24 Complaint; and (4) extend the time for Defendants to file an Answer to the Fourth 25 Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 56.) 26 “In general, a court should liberally allow a party to amend its pleading.” Sonoma 27 Cty. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. Sonoma…